Green Room

Non-apology not accepted, Dave.

I’m going to have to respectfully disagree with Allahpundit that his Letterman quote includes an apology. It does not. It includes a post-modern faux apology: “sorry that you rubes misunderstood the joke, which I at least now admit wasn’t funny. To you. Obviously a good portion of my audience enjoyed it immensely and clearly understood it, especially when I non-apologized a couple of days ago. I’ll be more humble this time and see if it flies, so I don’t lose any more sponsors. As a responsible adult I want you to know I did take the time to check and see if that Palin kid was over 18 before I called her a tramp. Because that’s the kind of guy I am, and, again, it’s not your fault that it was misunderstood, it’s my fault. That it was misunderstood. The important thing is that unlike Imus, I’m a liberal who means well, so I deserve a pass for anything I say that is offensive.”

A real apology would not have included all that, “you completely misunderstood me” nonsense. It only takes a few seconds to say, “I was out of line, and I’m sorry for saying that.” Except, in spite of the fact that Letterman admits “it can’t be defended,” he does try to defend it by saying that the real problem is with our perception. Since he laughingly suggested Bristol, not Willow, Palin might have sex with a stranger in a public place, all should be forgiven? Nor do I believe he was talking about Bristol. He checked her age, but somehow wasn’t aware that it was her sister at the game, not her? News reports just referenced a Palin girl but did not name her? Sorry, not buying. I certainly don’t believe he’s sorry or he’d have omitted the excuses which negated the apology.

Non-apology still not accepted, Dave. I hope sometime soon he’ll really comprehend how wrong he is, and if he ever does, his first request for forgiveness won’t be to the Palins or to his audience.

But in the meantime I’ll drop the issue, because I want him to stay on the air. Every time I channel surf past his show on my way to Qubo to watch a far more entertaining Jane and the Dragon rerun, I will pity that bitter, bitter man, seething with hate that he now has to contain in order to keep his job. Because we have that power over him; we can require him to behave decently, and he knows it. That’s punishment enough.

Comments

However, If I heard the offense directed at someone else, then, yes, I am offended too, because that body party is a part of me, ie: my sisters, daughters, friends, etc.

My bone of contention here is that you may have been offended but you were not targeted.

I’ve provided specific reasons for letting the targets of insults or snide jokes to accept of refuse apologies rather than other parties and you haven’t actually responded to that. You have floated further evidence that you were offended as well but I never contested that. I did state that people other than targets of insults shouldn’t expect apologies provided specific reasons for that. I also stated specific reasons why people other than targets shouldn’t get a vote in whether apologies are accepted or refused.
I fell the passion of your response but I don’t feel that you have actually addressed the points put out there.

When did conservatives become the party of victimhood and political-correctnessdom?
Palin Steele on June 16, 2009 at 2:19 PM

The real question is: since when did we allow inequality to stand in the liberal social-political arena?

Because that is the day we lost.

We’ve got a younger generation to influence here and the media is making the liberals and democrats out to be the cool ones, thereby influencing the up and coming generation in all the ways of their twisted mindset, of what is correct, decent, honest, fair and good.

If that is what you all collectively want, or allow to happen, then you collectively deserve the government and social environment that you get here.

Before I say something that gets me banned here, let me just say that if it happens, it’s because I have given up hope for this country, that essentially, the majority here do not have the will to defend the decency that is at the foundation and underpinnings of this country.

I am getting real sick and tired of this back and forth, and, if I get banned for something that I say, then it is just as well, because then I can go poke my head in the sand and pretend everything is alright with this world.

I’ve been here long enough to not recognize some of the names above that are calling for Letterman’s blood (not including Laura in this) and questioning the testicles of others.

If I’m wrong I’m wrong, but could some of them be lib trolls just trying to rattle the cages of the more torch-and-pitchfork inclined among Hotair’s regulars? To what end I can’t fathom…to cherry pick bad quotes (“SEE? See the kind of simian retards posting at HA?”) or just for laughs, maybe. But something ain’t right here.

Before I say something that gets me banned here, let me just say that if it happens, it’s because I have given up hope for this country

Please don’t think I’m being snide here – If you have truly given up hope why would you bother to comment? Even on a blog? If all hope is gone wouldn’t you just be wasting your energy and effort on something you feel to be useless?

Chose your fights carefully and avoid exhaustion. You seem like you’ve put a lot of yourself out there. That strikes me as something likely to exhaust somebody rather than the actions of a man who has decided that everything is hopeless.

“if” is the key word but the rest of that same response seems to unwind into somebody that believes they are about to be banned and that the situation is hopeless. *shrug* I won’t express concern in the future.

What part of “too all those who may have been offended” do you not understand? That is what Dave said: he apologized to Sarah Palin, to Willow & Bristol & to “all those who may have been offended.” Those “all those” people are Laura & me — she & I have every right to not accept his apology.

It’s like people can’t even understand plain English anymore.

DontTaseMeBro on June 16, 2009 at 12:07 PM

Your point may very well be that you think Letterman shouldn’t lose his job over that, and that is fair enough. But don’t drag the 1st Amendment in to it like that means anything when it is members of the public, not the government, who want him gone.

What part of “too all those who may have been offended” do you not understand? That is what Dave said: he apologized to Sarah Palin, to Willow & Bristol & to “all those who may have been offended.” Those “all those” people are Laura & me — she & I have every right to not accept his apology.

Dark Star on June 16, 2009 at 2:53 PM

Are you sure you are understanding me?
I’ve already acknowledged that Letterman apologized to Palin and I said that was proper. Why you bring that up again is not clear given how explicitly I have acknpowledged that.
I have also stated that you and Laura may be offended but I don’t feel that such offense is either useful or legitimate. I provided specific reasons to explain why I felt that this sort of grievance mongering is neither useful nor legitimate. Thus far nobody has responded to those reasons except to say that “they have every right to be offended” or “I’m offended anyway”.If that’s all you have to offer in response you haven’t actually responded to an argument – you’ve just re-iterated that your sensibilities have been offended.

Oh dear. That should have been DontTaseMeBro not Dark Star. Many apologies. I’m still getting used to using HTML in comments and the interrupting things still throws me. I didn’t mean to chop out that much. Sorry.

I don’t believe in forced apologies. It’s obvious that Mr. Letterman only regrets the ignorance of the audience. Sarah Palin was right to accept this “apology”. and move on since Letterman is incapable of heartfelt,honest apology.He is an angry,bitter misogynist who is no longer funny.

*grin* I was attempting to respond to the passage quoted by DarkStar. I clipped out too much and it looked as if Dark Star was being credited with what you said. I also missed that it was supposed to be a block quote. I thought you were repeating what you had said earlier word for word as if I had said nothing.

Yes – I’m new to online forums. Yes – I know that is unusual these days. Yes – I know I’m making mistakes that other people stopped making 10 years ago. Yes – I’m apologizing to you and Dark Star alone and not anybody else that may have seen it and been offended. *grin*

Thus far nobody has responded to those reasons except to say that “they have every right to be offended” or “I’m offended anyway”.If that’s all you have to offer in response you haven’t actually responded to an argument – you’ve just re-iterated that your sensibilities have been offended.

dieudonne on June 16, 2009 at 3:00 PM

I guess you conveniently missed this:

We’ve got a younger generation to influence here and the media is making the liberals and democrats out to be the cool ones, thereby influencing the up and coming generation in all the ways of their twisted mindset, of what is correct, decent, honest, fair and good.
Mcguyver on June 16, 2009 at 2:42 PM

That’s your answer.

If we are not concerned any further than the inconvenience of our own little time frame and context, then the Republic for which much blood has been shed, prior to us, be damned, ie: Freedom of expression/assembly, the right to retribution, etc.

He specifically apologized to the Palins and the two girls in particular. He did also address it more widely to anyone else who was offended, but the important thing is that he directed it at those he actually wronged.

And now, in anticipation of Mcguyver’s fury, I will drop and give him 20… hugs!

Jim Treacher on June 16, 2009 at 1:50 PM

See, I know that cuz I read your post.

I just think the other side of it (the omni-apology) is worthless and should be ignored. We’re being as phony by debating it as he was for offering it.

“I apologize to the Palins, and the rest of you can go take a hike.” Yeah, that’d work.

Silly. And entirely unnecessary. As was already noted, just apologize to the Palins and have done with it without the disingenuous CYA.

In the aftermath, I’m not going to give Dave any particular kudos for offering me a meaningless apology and what goes between him and the Palins isn’t my concern. I still think less of him for what he said. Not much less, because it’s not like he had far down to go.

We’ve got a younger generation to influence here and the media is making the liberals and democrats out to be the cool ones, thereby influencing the up and coming generation in all the ways of their twisted mindset, of what is correct, decent, honest, fair and good.
Mcguyver on June 16, 2009 at 2:42 PM

That’s your answer.

If we are not concerned any further than the inconvenience of our own little time frame and context, then the Republic for which much blood has been shed, prior to us, be damned, ie: Freedom of expression/assembly, the right to retribution, etc.

I don’t think there was any doubt as to the target of the jokes – Sarah Palin. Other offended parties were more or less bystanders that happened to be offended — collateral damage as it were.

Custom and tradition stipulates that it is the target of such attacks that gets to accept or refuse apologies. This custom did not arise from a vacuum. The custom prevents both grievance mongers or the irrationally belligerent from steering the ship when we adhere to it. I don’t believe the form should be abandoned here.

We’ve got a younger generation to influence here and the media is making the liberals and democrats out to be the cool ones, thereby influencing the up and coming generation in all the ways of their twisted mindset, of what is correct, decent, honest, fair and good.
Mcguyver on June 16, 2009 at 2:42 PM

You just answered the question of why your proposed course of action is not only useless but counterproductive.

This has long this been a battle for the perceptions of the public; where socialists are involved, that’s what it has always come down to. It is an ongoing battle in which lying statists have long had the upper hand because they know what conservatives will and won’t do. They know that conservatives, at their core, give others the benefit of the doubt, try to believe the best, try to keep the peace, live and let live, and above all do not emulate the slimy tactics of the enemy, even when they know they work. The statists know this, so they’ll know exactly how to respond should conservatives try to use their own playbook against them.

Result: Conservatives are made out to be hypocrites and whatever integrity the public thinks they have is diminished. Playing by the rules of the statists is a lose/lose for our side. I suspect that’s why conservative leaders – who MUST be tempted to do so – don’t.

But go ahead. Start or join a nationwide movement to get DL canned and you’ll just make him a martyr in the mind of the masses. That – and ONLY that – is how it will be spun and presented to them. The manufactured outrage is all they’ll hear. CBS will then have “good” reason to stand up for DL against your “rethuglican thought police” (so you will be labeled, and so you will be viewed).

You’ll have accomplished nothing…moreover, people will be led to believe that Palin is the evil behind it (which is why I wondered if you might really be one of the anti-Palin trolls herebouts lately…sorry if I was mistaken on that).

We’ve got a younger generation to influence here and the media is making the liberals and democrats out to be the cool ones, thereby influencing the up and coming generation in all the ways of their twisted mindset, of what is correct, decent, honest, fair and good.
Mcguyver on June 16, 2009 at 2:42 PM

splink on June 16, 2009 at 3:30 PM
You just answered the question of why your proposed course of action is not only useless but counterproductive.

You are a duplicitous doofus that got away with doing naughty things in a liberal socialist school system, to wit:

This has long been a battle for the perceptions of the public; where socialists are involved, that’s what it has always come down to.

Your double-cross-talking…. but confirming what I said, is proof that the brain damage has already been done, in far too many of you.

It is an ongoing battle in which lying statists have long had the upper hand because they know what conservatives will and won’t do.

You ARE making my point, about defending the underpinning decency of this country, THANK YOU.

They know that conservatives, at their core, give others the benefit of the doubt, try to believe the best, try to keep the peace, live and let live, and above all do not emulate the slimy tactics of the enemy, even when they know they work.

That’s why we are losing the battle.
The LEFTY STATISTs have long since removed all doubt as to their intentions and we are a bunch of wussified, shriveled and washed up pu$$ies, who don’t think it is worth our time to defend our country’s values, when the going gets tough and we get maligned for standing for them.

The statists know this, so they’ll know exactly how to respond should conservatives try to use their own playbook against them.

No they don’t. In fact, it’s so rare, that if we were to do it, they would back down in embarrassment, that is, if we truly take a stand.
Witness the Obama campaign being set back on their heels the day after the Republican convention, after Sarah’s biting speech!!.

Result: Conservatives are made out to be hypocrites and whatever integrity the public thinks they have is diminished.

Evil only progresses because good people allow it, and being called hypocrites, by hypocrites, is evil!!

Playing by the rules of the statists is a lose/lose for our side. I suspect that’s why conservative leaders – who MUST be tempted to do so – don’t.

We make our own rules and then actually fight.
Ronald Reagan was exhibit “A” of this in fighting back, both on his own terms and the opponents terms, but he was so good and smooth at it, that people largly missed (or forgot) the strategy.

But go ahead. Start or join a nationwide movement to get DL canned and you’ll just make him a martyr in the mind of the masses.
That – and ONLY that – is how it will be spun and presented to them.

Don Imus will have company.

The manufactured outrage is all they’ll hear. CBS will then have “good” reason to stand up for DL against your “rethuglican thought police” (so you will be labeled, and so you will be viewed).

This is not manufactured outrage, you Doofus!! God!!What kind of country do you want?!

Refer back to the decent underpinnings of this country.

Our comeback will be that Imus was a target of “dethuglocrat thought police” and we demand equal treatment.

You’ll have accomplished nothing…

Dave will be fired and the lefties will learn a lesson that they haven’t learned in years.

moreover, people will be led to believe that Palin is the evil behind it.

This is not about her, this is about the decent underpinnings of this country.

Palin will stay out of it, because she accepted the apology.

::::

In closing, remember the words of the Gipper himself, President Ronald Reagan who said, “If you take away the dream, you take away the power of the spirit.

I just think the whole debate between you and Laura is sort of wrongheaded. He made, essentially, two apologies.

One to Palin et. al, which is her deal to accept or reject. None of our business except to comment on what she might do and what this says about Dave.

Another to everyone he offended, which is really what we’re all talking about when we discuss accepting or rejecting an apology. The one he made Palin doesn’t effect us. My point is, there’s not really a lot to talk about since this is about as genuine as most people’s “outrage” on the issue … which is to say, not very. We weren’t really wronged, and it takes us into grievance kabuki territory by debating it because debating it assumes it’s a worthwhile thing to talk about in the first place.

Unrepentant, you have a good point regarding those of us with no real skin in the game are as mock outraged as the mock apology was sincere…but, ‘ol Dave quit being funny years ago. To get his groove back he joined the anti-conservative pro-liberal sludge pile that controls our media. They have skewered us for years and we see that. That he is squirming is just fine with most of us because hopefully it projects to the rest of them. If they actually look inward for the right reason then this is a good thing and perhaps the coarseness of the debate can be smoothed a bit.